Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses that the SSE stream is collected into a single reply and that a registered-user JWT is required, but says nothing about error behavior, rate limits, or whether the call creates persistent state.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two tight sentences with the core behavior front-loaded and the auth constraint appended. No wasted wording, though the parenthetical could be folded more cleanly.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a six-parameter tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is thin: it does not describe the reply shape, error handling, or how inline prompt mode relates to agent_id. Adequate to call it, but not complete.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all six parameters including the inline-prompt vs agent_id modes. The description only reinforces the access_token requirement, adding little beyond the structured fields.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource ('Single-turn conversation with an agent') and clarifies the transport behavior ('SSE stream collected into a reply'). It implicitly distinguishes itself from session/task siblings via 'single-turn', though it never names them explicitly.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description notes the auth prerequisite (registered-user JWT) but gives no explicit guidance on when to use this versus actora_gateway_create_session or actora_gateway_create_task. Usage is only implied by the 'single-turn' framing.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.